About Me

Name:Tony Sacco
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Search

Pretexting, Private Eyes, And The Law

PINE BLUFFS -   Pretexting - the practice of acquiring personal information of others by subterfuges, such as impersonation - has been very much in the news lately. When Mark Hurd, President, Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and Chairman of the Board of Hewlett-Packard, took the witness stand before the House Committee on Energy and Commerce’s Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations September 2006, he tearfully apologized for his company’s use of private detectives who employed this practice. Heretofore, Hewlett-Packard’s reputation in the public domain had been impeccable.

          Labeled “The Hewlett-Packard Pretexting Scandal” by the media, the situation arose when it was discovered that H-P’s former Chairwoman, Patricia Dunn, attempting to track down the source of anonymous leaks of proprietary information by H-P insiders to reporters, hired a private detective firm, Security Outsourcing Solutions, Inc. (SOS), to investigate other members of the Board of Director, to find the source of the leaks. It also may have relied upon its own Global Investigations Unit, based in Boston.   Overzealous, these agents of the company obtained reporters’ telephone records without permission, by impersonating journalists from the Wall Street Journal and other news organizations in the practice known as Pretexting. Predictably, when magazine and newspaper reporters realized that if their telephone records could be accessed by outsiders, it would be extremely difficult to keep their sources secret, a media frenzy ensued.

          Never mind that in the ‘70s and ‘80s, the media - specifically Television - had helped to make Pretexting respectable with its TV shows dealing with private investigators such as the charismatic James Garner playing likeable ex-con Jim Rockford in The Rockford Files, David Janssen’s Harry O, who knew all the scams and wasn’t above using them, and Thomas Magnum of Magnum, P.I. While these TV series were running, nothing was heard from the media about violations of anyone’s rights to privacy.

          Although not illegal back then, Pretexting is illegal now. In 1999, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act made it a crime to utter false or fraudulent statements for the purpose of obtaining information from a financial institution, a customer of a financial institution, or to ask another person to obtain this type of information for you.

          Here’s another blatant situation, about which I’ll bet you haven’t heard. The perpetrator was a Democrat; the victim, a prominent Republican. During 2005 with the Maryland political situation heating up, Lauren B. Weiner, a former research associate for the Democrat Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC)), pretended to be Republican Lieutenant Governor Michael Steele, thought to be the most-likely opponent of Congressman Ben Cardin (D-MD) in the upcoming race to replace retiring Democrat Senator Paul Sarbanes. Winning, you see, is everything to some people.

          According to a Justice Department press release, Weiner conducted public records searches on Steele, discovered his social security number, and used it to obtain his credit report.

          Major credit bureaus permit one to obtain a free copy of his or her own credit report online. Weiner approached Experian, but was stymied since it required Steele’s driver’s license, which she did not have. She then tried TransUnion. There she was able to set up a pass-word protected account and, using her DSCC computer, requested that Steele’s financial report be e-mailed to her Yahoo account, gopsteele@yahoo.com. Her supervisor found out, reported it to the District Attorney’s office, and after an FBI investigation, Weiner was indicted.

          An investigator does not have to lie, cheat or steal for a client. He can obtain much personal information on others in legitimate ways, because that information is out there. For example, if you’ve been divorced or named a party to a civil or criminal suit, your full name, home address, date of birth, the name of a former spouse, and your children, if any, are readily available to any investigator with the expertise to conduct a search. Private Investigators DO have a professional Code of Ethics, and most of us attempt to live up to it as we go about our daily business. By calling attention to this illegal practice, hopefully it will disappear completely, before it claims any more victims.


         
Anthony J. Sacco, Sr., a licensed private investigator with 17 years of experience, writer, and author of two novels; The China Connection, and Little Sister Lost, holds degrees from
Loyola College of Maryland and the University of Maryland Law School. His articles have appeared in the Washington Times, Baltimore Sun, Voices for the Unborn, the Catholic Review, WREN Magazine, and the Wyoming Catholic Register. His third book, a biography of Boston
sports great, Guy Vitale, will be out soon. E-mail him at anthonyjsacco@hotmail.com and visit his website at www.saccoservices.com.  To read an exerpt from his latest book, Echoes in the Wind, go to http://www.saccoservices.com/echoesinthewind.php.

 

 


 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Ellen Sauerbray: Wonder Woman or Mere Mortal?

PINE BLUFFS - On September 1, 2005, seated behind his desk in the Oval Office, a smiling President Bush announced his appointment of Ellen Richmond Sauerbray to become Assistant Secretary of State for Population, Refugees and Migration. At the time, Sauerbray was serving as Ambassador to the U.N. Commission on the Status of Women. Almost immediately, Refugees International, Population Action International, Salon Magazine and the Washington Post, spouting the vitriol for which the Left is known, voiced opposition. What, exactly, had Ellen Sauerbray done to collect such powerful far-left opponents?

          To begin: for three years, she had effectively represented the Administration on international women’s issues. Staunchly opposed to abortion, she caused a stir among assorted pro-abortion activist groups with her efforts to amend the Women’s Rights Declaration hammered out in China, to eliminate language stating that women’s rights include a right to abortion.

          In November 2005, Sauerbray, newly returned from a conference of First Ladies of the Americas in Paraguay where she represented Laura Bush, appeared before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. But her confirmation was held up by a disgruntled Barbara Boxer (D-CA), who seems dissatisfied with any nomination this President makes.

          Although appointments to international delegations and deputy-level State Department positions don’t require the advice and consent of the Senate, Assistant Secretaries of State posts do. Serving in the position means Sauerbray oversees a 700 million dollar budget dealing with refugee protection, resettlement and humanitarian aid.    

          Who is this woman in whom Mr. Bush reposed such confidence? For the answer, we need to turn back the clock to . . .  a balmy Baltimore evening in June 1955, as the graduating class of Towson High School in Baltimore County, Maryland, filed from the stage, 420 strong - Ellen Richmond among them - and burst from high school as if shot from a cannon, the strains of the school’s song ringing in their young ears: 


Our strong bonds can ne’er be broken,

Formed at Towson High,

Far surpassing wealth unspoken,

Sealed by friendships tie.

 

          The class theme? That was from Shakespeare: “All the world’s a stage and all the men and women merely players; they have their exits and their entrances; one man in his time plays many parts . . .”

           Hardly original. But this was ’55. The kids were clean-cut and unsophisticated. Most had dads who went off to work daily and moms who stayed home and took care of the house and them; Ozzie and Harriet was the favorite TV sitcom, divorce was practically unheard of, drug users were shunned by their peers, and kids stayed in school because, eager to face life’s challenges, they actually wanted to learn. Ellen’s classmates would go on to become actors, authors, doctors, lawyers, military and civilian pilots, engineers, nurses, writers, and even movie producers.

          That night in ‘55, as Ellen Richmond changed from cap and gown into her Prom dress, could she have guessed what her future held? Years as a high school Biology instructor, a Republican delegate in the Legislature of a predominantly Democrat state, minority leader in that same House of Delegates, Maryland state Chairwoman for Mr. Bush’s 2000 campaign, two runs for Governor and two near misses, an appointment by the President as Ambassador to the U.N. Commission on the Status of Women, and culminating perhaps, like the final act of an exciting Broadway play, with this latest appointment.

          Not bad for a kid from northeast Baltimore, whose father was a steel worker and whose mother was a stay-at-home mom. Ellen’s father, Edgar Richmond, toiled for years in the Hot Strip Mill Department of now-defunct Bethlehem Steel Corporation. A union man, he worked his way up to a job as foreman. When the corporation closed for a year, he drove a taxi to put bread on his family’s table. Called back when the mill reopened, he suffered a serious illness, first erroneously diagnosed as Multiple Sclerosis, and died of cancer in May 1977.

          “The family had some tough times,” Ellen recalled, “but we stayed close.” One of the best things about those early years? “Playing in the back yard with my dog, Dusty,” a black and white, ahh . . . dog.

          Ellen’s family moved to a row house in suburban Towson in 1951. Her parents ordered the daily newspaper delivered. It was - by young Wilmer Sauerbray, a neighbor kid who, years later, would marry their daughter.

          In high school, Ellen “. . . liked the science subjects.” Her involved parents made sure she worked hard. A highly-motivated student, she was a leader among her classmates. Membership in the drama society allowed her to perform in high school plays, a skill she’d put to good use later.

          Her favorite teacher during high school, John Dueber, a Chemistry instructor and local evening radio talk show personality, opened her inquiring mind to the world of ideas, as all good teachers do. Ellen set her heart on becoming a teacher. But for that, college was necessary. “I always wanted to go to college,” Ellen recalled. “But I didn’t know if my family could afford it. Mom and Dad committed to pay for one year. [After that] I could go to Towson State, where Mom later worked [and tuition would be free].”

          Ellen traveled fifty miles from home to attend Western Maryland College, a Methodist school in Westminster, Maryland. A partial scholarship and a stint working in the college dining hall helped pay the freight. “I had to work hard to get through,” she said.


         
At college, Ellen excelled. She chose her major in sophomore year and sailed
 
through 
school in four years, typical back then.

           At WMC, Ellen’s Biology teacher, Isabelle Isenogle, Ph. D. helped shape her future. “She made Biology a fascinating subject, and because of her I changed my major to Biology,” Ellen relates. In 1959 she graduated with high honors, the proud holder of a Bachelor of Arts degree. Was she excited about having done so well? “[Yes. And] I couldn’t wait to start teaching,” she said.  

          After college, Ellen married her “paper boy” sweetheart, Wil Sauerbray. At the time, Will worked as a Mechanical Engineer for Black and Decker, a nationally-known toolmaker headquartered in Towson. The couple is still together, testimony to their commitment to each other and their respect for their marriage vows.

          In the fall of 1959, Ellen embarked upon a teaching career, which lasted until 1964. During that time, she taught Biology. Was she a good teacher? From her campaign literature, second run for Governor of Maryland, 1998: “But she did more than just teach Biology. She taught her students about life; about a commitment to excellence; about self discipline and self-respect.”

          When asked about her teaching days, Ellen nodded sagely: “Today’s kids are no different than my former students. They want to be challenged.”

          In the summer of 1968, Ellen and Wil visited Wil’s relatives in Bavaria, West Germany and Thuringen, East Germany. The Berlin Wall divided East and West Berlin, and Germany was still split into sectors controlled by the U.S., Britain, and the Soviet Union. The trip changed Ellen’s life.

          During their three-month jaunt, she saw, first-hand, the contrast between lifestyles. Passing through dreary checkpoints at the ugly Berlin Wall, she started thinking about the importance of personal freedom.

          An article about her in the alumni magazine at WMC - now McDaniel College, re-named after a primary benefactor - said this: “While West German farmers worked their land at night using headlights on huge modern combines, East German workers punched time clocks and rushed home from their non-productive collective farms to work their tiny garden plots with hoes, eager to reap what they could from the only thing they owned.” (The Hill, fall 2004).

          This European odyssey taught Ellen: “that when government deprives people of personal freedom and property rights, it destroys incentive, risk-taking, capital investment and economic growth.”

Back home, she lost no time pursuing her new interest - politics - as a Republican Party activist, supporting Ronald Reagan’s 1968 presidential bid. That led to her election to the Republican State Central Committee. A fiscal and social conservative, she also helped found the Maryland Taxpayers Coalition, and accepted leadership roles in other Republican groups.

          In 1978, she was elected to Maryland’s House of Delegates. At the time, women were rare in Maryland politics. Since The Line State was resoundingly Democrat, Ellen ran on issues that resonated with voters across the political spectrum; lowering taxes and reducing the size of state government. For the next sixteen years, voters returned her to Annapolis.  By ‘86, her cohorts in the House thought enough of her to elect her Republican Minority Leader, a post she held until 1994. While there, she helped instill in Republican legislators enough backbone to articulate a coherent Republican message for Maryland voters. This would help immensely during her first run for governor.

          That first run happened in 1994. Lacking widespread name recognition, she trekked from one end of Maryland to the other, speaking to whomever she could round up to listen. Before long, she was filling halls and raising campaign dollars with her message of fiscal responsibility, lower taxes and less government. When smoke from a bruising primary campaign cleared, she had wrested the Republican nomination from tired Congressional House member, Helen Delich Bentley, who’d been the odds-on favorite. Nationally syndicated columnist George Will promptly dubbed Ellen, “Maryland’s Margaret Thatcher.”  

          Maryland had had no Republican governor for twenty-five years, and no woman had ever been its governor. Yet Ellen lost to Parris Glendening and an entrenched Democrat organization by only 5,993 out of 1.25 million votes.

          About her 1994 campaign and near miss, those in the know credit her with revitalizing the Maryland Republican Party, and energizing and encouraging its grass-roots supporters. Some claim that Republican gubernatorial candidate Robert Ehrlich was able to use the spadework done by Ellen to step into the Governor’s mansion four years later.

          Republican Party workers were not the only ones energized by her surprisingly good showing in 1994. Ellen was, too. So much so that she was itching for a rematch four years later.

          Her preparations began early. The editors of the Baltimore Sun noticed: “. . . A second Sauerbray-for-governor campaign, though, would be markedly different. She’ll be running against an incumbent, which is never easy. Public ire toward the Democratic Party has subsided. Republicans remain the minority party here by a 2 to 1 margin. While a promise to give voters a 24 percent income tax cut nearly got her elected in 1994, this may not be the burning issue of 1998 . . . Some Republicans worry that Ms. Sauerbray may still be regarded by undecided voters as too far right. The candidate scoffs at this notion. Still, Democrats tagged her with that label in 1994 and it worked.”

          Ever willing to give Republicans advice, the Sun’s editors continued: “The best way to overcome this is for Mrs. Sauerbray to enunciate policy positions that clearly place her in the mainstream of the conservative movement . . . “

          And a Washington Times, reporter wrote: “. . . in sharp contrast to that [previous] race, Mrs. Sauerbray appears set to make tax cuts a smaller part of her second campaign for governor. She’ll apparently focus on education and try to soften her public image, damaged by tough talk during that campaign and her aggressive challenge of the results.” (5/21/97). This article was penned the day after Ellen kicked off her second campaign for governor with a five-stop, statewide blitz.

          Ellen did recognize the need to reach out to voters across a broad spectrum. “[While] I would never . . . take the Republican base for granted,” she said (Baltimore Sun, 5/18/97), “I believe it’s essential to broaden the base to win in November.” Attempting to do just that, she was interviewed by Jeremy Redmon (Washington Times, 8/4/97). Redmon wrote: “. . . although proud of her conservative values, Mrs. Sauerbray says she would not attempt drastic changes in current law if elected. Though she opposes abortion and gun control, she says she wouldn’t try to ban either. She says she is realistic: in polls, most Maryland voters favor legalized abortion and gun control laws.”   

          Her effort to re-cast herself didn’t work. Despite a loyal following, a statewide organization that sprang into action, and the kind of name recognition for which any candidate would kill, her attempt to “place herself in the mainstream of the conservative movement” by appealing to moderate Republicans and Reagan Democrats while holding onto her base supporters, failed. She lost again, this time by ten percentage points. Discouraged, she renounced her ambition to become Maryland’s first female governor and returned to her Baldwin home - for awhile. “I haven’t had much of a personal life in a long time,” she commented (Baltimore Sun, 11/11/98). “There could be a temptation to kick back . . . but that would last me about 30 days. The odds are I’ll soon be looking for a new challenge.”

          Ellen had nothing for which to be ashamed. Listen to Maryland’s Republican Governor Bob Ehrlich, elected in 2002. “Ellen Sauerbrey altered Maryland’s political landscape in a manner unmatched by few women in Maryland’s history.”

          On a pleasant morning in September 1998, Ellen trekked to Tyson’s Corner, Virginia, a bedroom community called home by many who work in Washington, D.C. It was two months prior to the election. She raised 300,000 dollars at a breakfast - with a little help from her friends. One of them was George Herbert Walker Bush.

          Chaired by host, J.W. Marriott, Jr., CEO of Marriott International, Inc. this wildly-successful fundraiser’s guest list read like Who’s Who in American Politics; Senator Robert Packwood (R-O), Governor Edward Schafer (R-ND), Representative Thomas Davis, (R-VA), Representative Robert Ehrlich (R-MD), and many state and local dignitaries. Republicans eagerly turned out to support Ellen, thinking she had a shot at the governorship of a state securely in the Democrat’s column since the days of Spiro Agnew.

          Called upon to welcome the former president of the United States, Ellen introduced him as having brought “dignity, honor and decency” to the White House. Referring to Mr. Clinton’s antics, she remarked: “We look forward to the day when we can once again be proud of the presidency as we were with you.” She would get her wish in the person of Mr. Bush’s son, George. Two years later, the younger Bush would help her launch another new career.

          President George W. Bush has always been an astute judge of competence. That showed in his Supreme Court selections of John Roberts and Samuel Alito. It’s not surprising that shortly after moving to the White House in 2000, he tapped Ellen to represent his Administration at the U.N. Commission on Human Rights Conference in Geneva. Pleased with her expertise and energy, he quickly followed up by appointing her to the U.N. Commission on the Status of Women. In that capacity, she represented the Administration in forums addressing social, educational, economic, and political concerns of women. In 2003 alone, she traveled to Tblisi, Georgia and Buenos Aires, Argentina, speaking on behalf of women’s rights, mentoring women’s organizations about how they might become involved in the political process.

          Recognizing that success entails taking risks and accepting both victory and defeat, she delivered a powerful message to audiences throughout the world: “Women are just as capable as men,” she said. “You can make a difference, but only if you believe you can and are willing to work to make it happen.”

          2004, the 10th Anniversary of the International Year of the Family, saw her attending a series of regional dialogues in Mexico City, Stockholm, Geneva, and Kuala Lumpur, preparing for the U.N.’s International Conference for the Family in Doha, Qatar, later that year. Ellen is proud of her preparatory work on that conference, which produced the Doha Declaration, affirming the family as the natural unit of society, entitled to protection by the state, as specified in Article 16(3) of the U.N.’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Doha Report calls upon all nations to uphold, preserve, and defend the institution of marriage.

          Ellen’s confirmation hearing began in early November 2005. She wasn’t flying beneath anyone’s radar. The president of Refugees International said Mr. Bush’s plan to appoint Ellen to this major State Department post suggests “a weakening of the Administration’s commitment to refugee protection.” He apparently believed that Sauerbrey’s opposition to abortion was the only reason that the President appointed her. While acknowledging that she’d been a strong advocate for women in several areas, including education, and economic and political empowerment, he said: “Before Senate confirmation, lawmakers [must] find out whether she is up to the task of handling the Administration’s refugee and humanitarian policies.”

          So battle lines were formed; those who abhor Ellen’s steely advocacy of women’s rights and pro-life stance on one side, the Administration, pro-life advocates and those who know her as a strong, effective leader on the other.

          At Ellen’s hearing, Democrats repeatedly voiced concern that the post of Assistant Secretary of State for Population, Refugees and Migration had been vacant for so long. Yet they agreed to Senator Boxer’s request and postponed voting until after their winter break. So on January 4, 2006, a disgusted George Bush exercised an option available to all presidents; the recess appointment. Sauerbray will serve in that office until the current Congressional session terminates at the end of 2007.

          In May 2007, Ellen addressed the World Conference of Families, and was given a warm welcome. As her appointment date approaches, she expects to travel extensively, furthering the Bush Administration goals on Population, Refugee and Migration issues.
         
One thing’s certain. Ellen Sauerbray, perhaps the latest, real-life version of TV’s Wonder Woman, has acquitted herself well in her new role, as she has in all the other roles in which she has found herself during her colorful career.         

           Anthony J. Sacco, author of The China Connection, a political thriller, and Little Sister Lost, a historical thriller, holds a B.S. degree in Political Science from Loyola College and a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Maryland. A writer and columnist, his articles have appeared in the Wyoming Catholic Register, the WREN Magazine, the Baltimore Sun, the Washington Times, and Voices for the Unborn. His third book, a biography of Boston sports great Guy Vitale, will be out shortly. He writes from Pine Bluffs, WY. E-mail him at anthonyjsacco@hotmail.com and visit him on the web at www.saccoservices.com. To read an exerpt from his latest book, Echoes in the Wind, go to http://www.saccoservices.com/echoesinthewind.php.

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Bob Novak owes Karl Rove and President Bush an Explanation and an Apology

PINE BLUFFS - Personally I’m kind of sorry to see Karl Rove go. And I’m certain that George W. Bush, who Mr. Rove served well since their time together in Texas, feels that way, too. But in the Valerie Plame Wilson matter, I don’t think Mr. Novak served either the President or Mr. Rove well. 

          All the hullabaloo over release of Novak’s memoirs has obscured a troubling question regarding his role in the Valerie Plame leak case: that is, why didn't Novak immediately issue a statement that Karl Rove was NOT his source?

          Am I the only one asking? Although Novak knew the primary source of the alleged leak to be former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, he waited almost three years before speaking out. His failure to do so earlier is puzzling, as is his reference in his "outing" column to having had conversations with "two senior White House officials." Surely he knew that such a remark would unleash the liberal media and Democrats in Congress and elsewhere on a "witch hunt" seeking the identity of those two. Perhaps that’s exactly what he wanted -
payback to the Bush Administration for a failure to provide this aging columnist with a “scoop” on something or other.

          Meanwhile, during that three year interval, the White House, President Bush and Mr. Rove were subjected to relentless attacks and harassment from the Left. Rove was forced to defend himself against unfounded accusations that he was the source of the leak. This required him to hire a lawyer at great personal expense, and waste his time and energy parading to the Courthouse to answer Grand Jury questions put to him by the special prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, and telling the same story: "I did not out Valerie Plame. There was no plot by the President to hurt Joe Wilson."

          Later, Fitzgerald admitted he had no evidence linking Rove to the leak. After his infamous press conference at which he announced that no indictment would be forthcoming against Rove, groans of disappointment from the Left were audible.

          And President Bush? He was accused by the liberal media (David Corn of The Nation Magazine was only one of many) of having masterminded a plot to "out" Joseph Wilson's wife to "get even" with Wilson for his 2002 report for the CIA debunking intelligence that Iraq tried to buy uranium in Africa. The liberal media also gave wide, prominent coverage to a Senate speech by Harry Reid (D-NV) placing this example of left-wing paranoia on the public record. Mr. Bush was also mercilessly slandered daily by Democrats for a "lack of moral values" and "lack of integrity." Talk about the proverbial pot calling the kettle black!

          Although Democrats continued publicly to parrot that the whole thing MUST have been a Republican plot, their sleazy house of cards finally completely collapsed around their ears in September 2006, when former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage confessed publicly that HE had revealed Plame's identity to Novak. That was followed a week later by a "clarification" column from Novak, which, although welcome and helpful, did not explain why he himself had not stepped forward early on with a statement that Rove had NOT been his source. Perhaps, in a way he has explained. All those years of heavy drinking in the
Washington pubs may have soaked his brain with alcohol, thereby slightly addling his thinking.

          A year ago I wrote in one of my columns: "Meanwhile, don't hold your breath waiting for an apology from liberal Democrats, commentators, and journalists to President Bush, Karl Rove, and the public for this partisan ploy, which was at the least an expensive distraction from the people's bona fide business." (See My Turn to Sound Off: Being a Liberal Means Never Having to Say You're Sorry! Anthony J. Sacco, Sr., special to www.saccoservices.com, October 2006. Now however, it appears that the above-named groups are not the only ones who owe apologies. Novak's explanation for why he kept silent and his apology for the harm his silence caused are long overdue. 
_____________
          Anthony J. Sacco, a writer, licensed private investigator, and author of two novels; The China Connection, and Little Sister Lost, holds degrees from Loyola College of Maryland and the University of Maryland Law School. His articles have appeared in the Washington Times, Baltimore Sun, Voices for the Unborn, the Catholic Review, WREN Magazine and the Wyoming Catholic Register. His third book, a biography of  East Boston sports great Guy Vitale, who went on to complete a fascinating CIA career, is due out soon. E-mail him at anthonyjsacco@hotmail.com and visit his website at www.saccoservices.com. To read an exerpt from his latest book, Echoes in the Wind, go to http://www.saccoservices.com/echoesinthewind.php.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Lebanon: Why is it Important to American Interests?

PINE BLUFFS - Lebanon, one of the few democracies and among the smallest countries in the Middle East, lies on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea. Bounded by much-larger Syria on the east and Israel to the south, it has experienced internal unrest for perhaps fifty years, as dissident social and cultural groups within the country - Islamic Muslims and Maronite Christians being the largest factions, although the terrorist organization Hezbollah has also made its presence felt - have refused to assimilate, and continue to vie for exclusive unshared power. No strong man of the stature of a dictatorial Joseph Broz Tito in Yugoslavia has ever emerged to control them. That’s not a bad thing, because although dictators can and do control internal warring factions, they often suppress civil liberties in the process.

          The 2006 crisis was precipitated by the assassination of well-liked Industry Minister Pierre Gemayal, 34, a member of the Phalange Party, shortly after he called upon Syria to withdraw its occupation troops from Lebanese territory and cease meddling in its affairs. His was the most recent in a string of political killings: former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in February 2005, anti-Syrian journalist Samir Kassir in June 2005, ex-Communist leader George Hawi in June 2005, and anti-Syrian Member of Parliament Gebran Teuni in December of that year. Since Gemayal’s death occurred shortly after his request for an end to Syrian influence, naturally that country is suspected of having had a hand in it. The Beirut government’s call for an international tribunal to investigate Syria’s possible role in Lebanon’s cycle of political murders has been seconded by American President, George W. Bush, who has requested “a full investigation to identify those people and forces behind the killings.” See Lebanon: Why is it Important to American Interests?  My website, www.saccoservices.com, Articles page. In characteristically slow fashion, the UN Security Council approved plans in December 2006 for a special international tribunal to try those accused of killing Hariri in February 2005. Although coming twenty-two months after the fact, this should please the Europeans, who strongly believe that they can talk their enemies to death instead of taking action.

          The situation in Lebanon has been further complicated by the terrorist organization Hezbollah, which inserted itself into the southern reaches of this tiny nation, between Beirut and its common border with Israel. Attempting to appease Hezbollah - shades of Neville Chamberlain’s handling of Adolph Hitler’s National Socialist (NAZI) Party in 1938 - the government permitted candidates from that group to stand for Parliament; akin to letting the fox into the henhouse. Several were elected, and together, pro-Syrian and Hezbollah factions in Parliament have been able to exert enough influence to keep Lebanon’s fledgling army from marching to dislodge the much more heavily armed Hezbollah interlopers. The take-over of Lebanese ground by Hezbollah’s militia - a sort of nation within a nation endeavor - from which it launched frequent rocket attacks against Israel, was what prompted Israel to cross Lebanon’s border to attack Hezbollah in early 2007. That move was only partially successful.     

          To further confuse matters, after Gemayal’s death, Hezbollah and pro-Syrian members of Parliament resigned, seeking to bring about yet another crisis for the elected Lebanese government. For several weeks, with the aid of some ill-informed citizens, Hezbollah staged massive street demonstrations to force the government to resign. This is reminiscent of Communist tactics in the United States back in the 1930s and 1940s, after they successfully infiltrated and took control of the Labor Movement.

          Today, three stark scenarios face the government of Prime Minister Fouad Siniora: civil war between pro-Syrian Hezbollah followers and the rest of the country, a coup d’etat which would place Hezbollah in power with Syrian backing, or the current government successfully moving to overcome Hezbollah. For the latter to happen, Lebanon’s outgunned army must be bolstered with arms and possibly advisers from America. That move, opposed by Democrats here, was taken by the Bush Administration in June 2007, when it shipped a small amount of weapons and ammunition to the Lebanese army so it could remove Hezbollah troops from a major refugee camp where they had attempted to set up a base of operations. More arms are needed.
          If the Lebanese people’s efforts to defend their democracy against Syrian and Iranian attempts to foment instability and violence are to succeed, the
United States must stand firmly in Lebanon’s corner. It will be well worth the effort.   
          Anthony J. Sacco, a writer, licensed private investigator, and author of two novels; The China Connection, and Little Sister Lost, holds degrees from Loyola College of Maryland and the University of Maryland Law School. His articles have appeared in the Washington Times, Baltimore Sun, Voices for the Unborn, the Catholic Review, WREN Magazine and the Wyoming Catholic Register. His third book, a biography of  East Boston sports great Guy Vitale, who went on to complete a fascinating CIA career, is due out soon. E-mail him at anthonyjsacco@hotmail.com and visit his website at www.saccoservices.com 

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Deeper End of the Pond: 7 Reasons for the Failure of America's Intelligence Community At the Beginning of the Iraq War

PINE BLUFFS - During the 2004 Presidential election campaign, when it became apparent that Democrat candidate John Kerry had glaring credibility problems, his supporters quickly developed a “strategy.” Attack the President’s credibility. Accuse him of lying about Iraq’s possession of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) when he led this Nation into war, and charge that the statement in his January 2003 State  of the Union address, “The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein sought to purchase quantities of uranium in Africa,” was false.

Hoping that damaging Mr. Bush’s credibility might level the playing field for Mr. Kerry, Democrats cited claims of former weapons inspectors Hans Blitz and David Kay, that they no longer believed Iraq possessed WMD. They also relied on former Ambassador Joseph Wilson’s contention that information he gathered in Niger during February 2002 proved the president’s claim false. Although this wrongheaded “strategy” was quickly shot down, it did serve to focus Congressional attention on a serious problem; why was intelligence given to Mr. Bush during the months just prior to the Iraq War so inaccurate?

In July 2003, a bipartisan Senate Select Intelligence Committee (SSIC) concluded that President Bush neither exaggerated nor lied about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction but, instead, was given faulty information by the CIA. The Committee also decided that British, American and other intelligence agencies had substantial reasons to believe that Saddam Hussein had indeed sought uranium in Africa. Additionally, its report thoroughly discredited Wilson’s claims, finding that “it was reasonable for analysts to assess that Iraq had sought uranium from Africa based on CIA reporting and other intelligence.” SSIC went on to list instances where Wilson himself had made false claims about the Niger affair, and questioned why the CIA had sent him on that mission, since he had no expertise in nuclear weapons.

But while exonerating Mr. Bush and shooting down Democrat allegations that he lied, the Senate Committee excoriated the intelligence community’s failure to obtain and accurately assess intelligence about Iraq. It asserted in the strongest terms that CIA capacities had been decimated in the mid-1990s, and suggested that the Agency needed fixing. How had our CIA, once the best in the world at clandestine human intelligence collection, come to such a sorry state?
        The failure to obtain accurate intelligence from Iraq and elsewhere in that region was caused by these seven things:
1) A hostile attitude emanating from liberal Democrats,
2) Emasculation of intelligence budgets during the Clinton presidency,
3) Presidential appointments of two unqualified DCIs,
4) Declassification of CIA Cold War covert operations methods,
5) Restraints on what was considered to be politically incorrect recruitment of agents,
6) Inclusion of more women and minorities at CIA,
7) A risk-averse mind-set among CIA leadership.
           An examination of the Democrat Party’s recent history reveals that at least since the McGovern era, liberal Democrats seem unwilling to defend America against foreign enemies. Worse, Democrats often support policies which, if followed, would lead to America’s defeat. It’s well known that Mr. Clinton and fellow Democrats hated the American military. Less well known is their hatred of America’s intelligence community.  Because of their hostility, during the 1990s Democrats championed deep cuts in CIA and NSA budgets.

          Also during that time frame, the Agency suffered from two disastrous DCI appointments. The worst was foreign-born John Deutch. Tapped by Mr. Clinton in 1995, Deutch promptly declassified records of all Cold War CIA operations, thus exposing its methods for all to see. He also placed restrictions on recruitment of “politically incorrect” agents - those previously arrested and convicted of a crime. Finally, he encouraged inclusion of more women and minorities at the Agency. Well, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that people lacking ties to criminal communities such as terrorist groups will fail in certain missions. Nor does one have to be brilliant to understand that, the religion of Islam being prevalent in the Middle East, women agents would be ineffectual there.   

Because of these problems, CIA moral suffered. By 2000, case officer resignations hit an all-time high and agent recruitments hit an all-time low. Enter George Tenet, CIA’s Deputy Director under Deutch. Mr. Clinton appointed him to the top spot in July 1997, after Deutch resigned suddenly.  

Under Tenet, at CIA stations around the world very little happened. Why? Intelligence gathering is extremely risky work, and Tenet ushered in a risk-averse mentality on Langley’s seventh floor. Risk-taking activity went out of vogue. Risk-takers no longer received performance bonuses. The way to earn a promotion was to play it safe, keep your head down, and stay on the reservation.

Agent recruiting? Unpopular because risky. The seventh floor had begun to weigh every recruitment with only one idea in mind: if this becomes public, how will it look in the Washington Post? By 2000, there were virtually no risk-takers operating in Iraq and surrounding nations. CIA’s section chief in Riyadh didn’t even speak Arabic, and had no Saudi recruitments. Further, spotting, assessing, developing, and recruiting an agent can take 6 months or more. With the onset of “the 30-day assignment,” intelligence gathering tradecraft became almost nil.

What about non-official cover agents (NOCs) - operatives who assume covert roles in non-government organizations, to infiltrate suspected terrorist groups and dig out information? During the Deutch and Tenet reigns, the few who were operating used business covers. But neither Deutch nor Tenet understood that executives and salesmen would be unable to penetrate Al Quada networks. Gone were the sleazy characters recruited because they could move easily among various unsavory elements. Gone were the front groups in Germany, France, Holland, Pakistan, Indonesia, Qatar, Sudan, and the UAE, created to infiltrate Islamic Jihadists who championed the killing of Americans.

Human intelligence (HUMINT) was almost non-existent during the years prior to the Iraq war. Sure, there were a few Agency paramilitary personnel (PMs) and civilian contractors out there, but their reports were often ignored at CIA. Between organizational timidity, political correctness, risk aversion, and lack of strong leadership at the operational level, CIA had become dysfunctional. It was unable to develop the human intelligence necessary to satisfy White House requests for answers.

          It was in this context that President Bush framed plans to invade Iraq and remove Saddam. And it was in this context that DCI George Tenet advised him that Saddam did have WMD, and an ongoing nuclear energy program to produce nuclear warheads.

          When the commander-in-chief is given evidence developed by intelligence agencies of his own and other nations, he cannot be faulted for acting on that information even if it’s erroneous. To accuse him of lying ignores the facts and flies in the face of truth.

But here’s the deeper end of the pond. If America is not to continue flying blind in much of the World, it’s crucial that the CIA takes immediate and decisive corrective measures, beginning with the Directorate of Operations (DO), to return to its core mission of creating and sustaining a viable human intelligence collection capacity.   

Anthony J. Sacco, a writer, licensed private investigator, and author of two novels; The China Connection, and Little Sister Lost, holds degrees from Loyola